Section 147 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.279

Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 279 (Income escaping assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 279 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 147 is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 of the 49,210 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 147

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
229 ITR 383 · 1998 · Supreme Court
5,834
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider new claims and additional grounds if the relevant facts are already on record. The purpose of assessment is to correctly determine tax liability, allowing both parties to raise issues.

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT
243 ITR 83 · 2000 · Supreme Court
2,943
citing judgments

For revision under Section 263, the Assessing Officer's order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue; if either condition is not met, the revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked. An order is not erroneous merely because the Assessing Officer did not record the details of enquiries conducted, provided due enquiries were made.

Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 399 · 2023 · Supreme Court
2,379
citing judgments

An assessment under section 153A is without jurisdiction if there is an absence of incriminating material for an unabated assessment year.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court
2,040
citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

Judgments on Section 147

Eravat Marketing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 23/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2003-04 Eravat Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/O-Umesh Goenka, 4832/24, Ward-11(2), New Delhi Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi (Pan: Aaace0422F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Dr. Ram Samujh, Adv. Respondent By : Sh. Raman Kang Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.11.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.11.2015 Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M.: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A) Dated 18.10.2012 Passed For The Assessment Year 2003-04. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: I. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Hon’Ble Cit (Appeals) Is Bad Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts. Ii. That The Hon’Ble Cit(Appeals) Erred On Facts & In Law In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 5,00,000/- On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credits U/S 68 Of The It Act, 1961. Iii. That The Hon’Ble Cit(Appeals) Has Grossly Erred In Law & In Facts In Confirming The Disallowance Of Loss Of Rs. 6,45,162/- As Was Claimed In Original Return Filed. Iv. That Hon’Ble Cit(Apepals) Erred In Law & In Facts In Confirming The Reopening Of The Case U/S 147 Without Making An Independent Enquiry & Without Having Reasons To Believe That The Income Has Escaped Assessment.

For Appellant: Dr. Ram Samujh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Raman Kang Garg, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

M/S J.C.Motors & General Finance Co Ltd, Kolkata vs. C.I.T Kolkata - I, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1047/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S.J.C.Motor & General Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Finance Co.Ltd. Ltd., 6A, Kolkata-I, Aayakarbhawan, P- Clive Row, 4Th Floor,Room 7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata No.6/12, Kolkata-700001. – 700 069. Pan : Aaccj 1816 G Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Uphar Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 71, Metcalfe Street, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-I, Aayakarbhawan, Kolkata – 700013. P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. Pan : Aaacu 9639 E Assessment Year 2009-10 M/S. Tejaswani Goods Pvt. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., 84/3, Panchantalla Kolkata-I, Aayakarbhawan, Road, 2Nd Floor, Liluah, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Howrah-711 204. Kolkata – 700 069. Pan : Aadct 1156 A Assessment Year 2008-09 M/S. Shark Vanijya Pvt. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., Room No.402, 4Th Kolkata-I, Aayakar Bhawan, Floor, 127, N.S.Road, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700001. Kolkata – 700 069. Pan : Aalcs 2837 H Assessment Year 2010-11 M/S. Gannet Vintrade Pvt. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., Rajesh Mohan & Kolkata-Ii, Aayakarbhawan, Associates, Bagati House, 5Th P-7, Chowringhee Square, Floor, Unit No.18, 34, Kolkata – 700 069. Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Kolkata-700013. Pan : Aadcg 4706 H (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : S.M.Surana, Advocate Department By : S.Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04&5.11.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 05 .11.2015 Order Through This Batch Of Appeals, Different Assessees Assail The Correctness Of Separate Orders Passed By The Commissioners Of Income-

For Appellant: S.M.Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: S.Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68